2010 Camaro Review Compilation

[Vash]

Originally Posted by pharmd

Find a Mag that you consistently read, and consistently agree with their reviews. I tend to agree with most of the opinions of Car and Driver over the years on the cars they reviewed and I have either driven or owned. So I am going to agree or listen to, them.

You all are on your own...

Tempting to flame cause this is some good bait. But people should have an open mind and just sticking to one rag sounds more limiting.

Really there is nothing but some opinions that we all don't already know. Each person should test drive the vehicle before buying. If you pre ordered of course you where sold already and ready to just deal with whatever issues pop up.

Don't ever just put your ear to just one source of info. No Sir.

How is that? I didn't flame him too bad did I?

[carsismeZ06]

I think the thing about the Camaro is it weighs a shit-load, and that's why in might have gotten marks taken off for handling (if it ever did, I haven't watched all of the reviews)

[stovt001]

Originally Posted by racingray68

Why are gm interiors allways terible? I think that I would fire everyone in that design department or just copy an import interior. when you pay almost 40,000 for a car the interior should make you feel good.

Depends on what your standards for a good interior are. Edmunds narrows their definition down to "soft plastics = good, hard plastics = bad." The problem is, I've seen plenty of interiors with hard plastics that are otherwise very durable, have a good texture, and all the major contact points are padded. On the flip side, I've seen plenty of interiors with soft plastics that felt like cheese left out in the sun too long. At least one other review noted that while the plastic is "hard", it still feels very high quality. So I guess it depends on what your definition is and who you believe. I'm withholding judgment until I feel it myself.

[GatorBlue371]

My favorite line


"no questions about the build quality (unlike with the Ford)."

[JSkibisky]

Being a current Mustang owner... and soon-to-be... hopefully... Camaro owner, I'm glad to see the 'Stang do as well as it did given the ancient live-axle set-up. The current Mustang (2007 in my case) has a "hard plastic" interior. It's perfectly livable... let's remember that the Camaro is not a $50K car... it's an outstanding package for the money. I'm looking forward to the day when I have both my 2007 Mustang GT and my 2010 2LT/RS Camaro... life is good !!

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by stovt001

Depends on what your standards for a good interior are. Edmunds narrows their definition down to "soft plastics = good, hard plastics = bad." The problem is, I've seen plenty of interiors with hard plastics that are otherwise very durable, have a good texture, and all the major contact points are padded. On the flip side, I've seen plenty of interiors with soft plastics that felt like cheese left out in the sun too long. At least one other review noted that while the plastic is "hard", it still feels very high quality. So I guess it depends on what your definition is and who you believe. I'm withholding judgment until I feel it myself.

I remember reading something along those lines in at least one of the reviews about the Camaro.

[6806goats]

Originally Posted by alleykt123

ZOMG!!!

I'm almost ready to trade the Goat now!!!

Kinda tempted but I don't like the interior or cheap plastic. Maybe later models will correct that. Impressed with everything else though. I can see it now as mentioned in a different magazine. The new Camaro is gonna be a performance whore as all these companies jump on the bandwagon to tweek power and handling. Maybe cheaper 9" IRS rears will make it out and can be easily adapted to the GTO...maybe even the Challenger.

I'm just being stubborn on not riding the wave to buy the new Camaro. Well and the fact that I just got the Goat paid for and only 18,000 miles. Now if they gave me $25k on a trade in or private sale then I might consider it but not for $18-20K. Guess GTO value ain't gonna climb any time soon if ever. But that's ok, I like it anyway. I'll wait a bit and buy a Camaro later on. Or just restore my 68 using tweeks and ideas from the new one. Chassis isn't the same but maybe that can be mimicked.

[Tran]

Added: Popular Mechanics (vs. Mustang & Challenger) -- (Discussion)

[Tran]

Added: Hot Rod -- (Discussion)

[Rob490]

WOW popular mechanics is SLOWWWWWWWWWWWW

They got a 5.6 0-60 in the Mustang, and a 6.4 0-60 in the challeger rt, thats slower than the v6 camaro for god sakes

[Info@PeddersUSA.com]

Originally Posted by PatrickfromMD

DMS and Pedders, I was hoping you or Pete would chime in.
So, do you have any comments regarding the handling comparisons of the new Camaro vs. the Mustang with track pak. I for one was expecting the camaro to be superior to the mustang out of the box, but in some respects the old school mustang was superior to the Camaro. That may be a blessing in disguise for you folks who will be supplying those of us who want a Mustang killer with parts, however I’m curious how this happened in the 1st place. Any insight to what contributed to the Camaro’s less than stellar outcome, and where you think the Camaro will benefit most. These answers would be welcome to those of us wanting to improve the Camaros performance here.

We have done a lot of research and R&D on the Mustang. We have not roadtested their track version, but have done their high end mustang. A typical for setup is to over spring and over shock the vehicle, Hit some repeating bumps, and she is all over the road. The article mentions this but in a very soft way.

One of the things that is perplexing to me is the v6 20 inch Camaro will our corner and out brake the SS Camaro. .93gs on the v6 and .90 on the Camaro, and 106ft V6 braking and 107 feet with the SS

The Mustang oversprings and overshocks their car, very much like GM did with te WS6 and the comparative Camaro. These rides only had about 1/4 inch suspension travel.

I sent a note to the editor about the 3 platforms and their comparisons. Doing a Pedders complete system changes the ball game all together. The sophistication of our Camaro is without a doubt blatantly obvious over the Mustang. But the OE suspension can be tweeked. We feel it is pretty easy to get to the .99gs with stock tires, and over 1.0 with upgraded tires with our systems.
the Mustang does not have the torque or hp of the Camaro, but it is seriously lighter, and have more options in the suspension than Camaro. But with us, our Track II is the pure Mustang eater option!!!! So have not fear!

There is a massive event popping up for Pedders in New Jersey. We are going to have our systems tested by proefessional Nascar drivers. We are really excited about it. Our G8 will be there and ready for the Track. We feel the g's will be over 1.0 on Pete's G8

mike
dms

[Info@PeddersUSA.com]

I was not surprised on what the Motor Trend article mentioned about the Challenger. It is the heaviest ant largest of the muscle cars tested. But when they chat about the body role, they are not kidding. Pedders has to work really hard to get the LX to the Pedders level. On the Challenger, we will replace 42 bushings, dampers, coils and sway bars. When our TrackII is installed, the Challenger becomes a scary beast. But the Camaro, with the similiar package, will eat them all!!

mike
dms

[john3352]

Guys that was great, the comparison turned out exectly the way I thought it would... Camaro on top, its hot, new and powerful. That quarter mile run of 13.0 @110mph is fast as hell, my question is what does it cost... and why are they not comparing it to the Challlenger SRT-8, and GT-500 as they have 400+ bhp... Just a heads up.. the new Camaro is faster that the Challenger SRT-8... not to 60, but throught the 1/4 mile... but not the 08-09 Shelby GT500...500-bhp 4.4 sec to 60 and the 1/4 in 12.7@ 114mph... also, new info on the 2010 GT500.. it will have 540bhp 510 lb/ft torque... but it will cost $46,000... they are already claiming they shaved off over 3/10ths off of the 0-60 time and almost a half sec of the 1/4 at beter than 118mph... I head GM may use the Cadillac motor from the CTS-V (556-bhp) but they are running lean on cash and shelved the idea as money and the financial markets have decimated GM... Im a big Ford fan, but im hoping GM can pull out of this... good luck Camaro guys
its a great day to be a car guy!

[DGthe3]

Originally Posted by john3352

Guys that was great, the comparison turned out exectly the way I thought it would... Camaro on top, its hot, new and powerful. That quarter mile run of 13.0 @110mph is fast as hell, my question is what does it cost... and why are they not comparing it to the Challlenger SRT-8, and GT-500 as they have 400+ bhp... Just a heads up.. the new Camaro is faster that the Challenger SRT-8... not to 60, but throught the 1/4 mile... but not the 08-09 Shelby GT500...500-bhp 4.4 sec to 60 and the 1/4 in 12.7@ 114mph... also, new info on the 2010 GT500.. it will have 540bhp 510 lb/ft torque... but it will cost $46,000... they are already claiming they shaved off over 3/10ths off of the 0-60 time and almost a half sec of the 1/4 at beter than 118mph... I head GM may use the Cadillac motor from the CTS-V (556-bhp) but they are running lean on cash and shelved the idea as money and the financial markets have decimated GM... Im a big Ford fan, but im hoping GM can pull out of this... good luck Camaro guys
its a great day to be a car guy!

because cost makes more sense than hp as a basis for comparison, a GT with the track pack costs about as much as a Camaro SS. And the Mustang GT is closer in power to the Camaro than the GT500 is. Some disagree with my cost argument, and thats fine. But the fact is, there is nothing on the market that is similar to the GT500 right now. So until there is a supercharged or LS7 powered Camaro (or supercharged Challenger/SRT10), Ford has that particular market to themselves.